Geology topics

Julian J. Bunn

Publications and source records attributed to Julian J. Bunn.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Refinements to the attenuated propagation of local earthquake shaking (APPLES) ground-motion-based earthquake early warning algorithm

We refined the Attenuated ProPagation of Local Earthquake Shaking (APPLES) ground-motion-based earthquake early warning (EEW) approach, and directly compare APPLES performance with that of the source-characterization-based U.S. ShakeAlert EEW system for a suite of historical earthquakes in the U.S. West Coast and Japan. APPLES is an extension of the Propagation of Local Undamped Motion (PLUM) algorithm in which observed shaking intensity at seismic stations is used to forward-predict intensity distributions to surrounding areas using an attenuation model derived from an intensity prediction equation. We test new configuration options within APPLES, such as using the second highest estimated ground motion rather than the maximum, to better match median ground-motion observations and reduce alerts for small magnitude earthquakes, both of which are key alerting priorities within ShakeAlert. We evaluate these configurations alongside ShakeAlert by comparing the ground-motion estimation accuracy and available warning times relative to station observations and ShakeMap distributions. Our preferred APPLES configuration produces accurate ground-motion estimates and corresponds better with median observations compared to ShakeAlert’s estimates. This preferred configuration substantially reduces alert issuance for M < 5.0 earthquakes compared to the previous APPLES configuration, and alert-release criteria can further restrict alerts to primarily M ≥ 5.5 earthquakes without requiring magnitude estimation. Prioritizing matching median-observed ground motions may reduce APPLES warning times compared to configurations that were tuned to avoid missed alerts (such as those that use the maximum estimated ground motions), which can lead to shorter warning times compared to ShakeAlert for the same alert threshold. However, station-based warning time assessments demonstrate that APPLES can outperform ShakeAlert for high target thresholds. APPLES is a simple, independent EEW approach that may improve the robustness of EEW for the West Coast of the U.S.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2025

ShakeAlert® version 3: Expected performance in large earthquakes

The ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system partners along with U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) licensed operators deliver EEW alerts to the public and trigger automated systems when a significant earthquake is expected to impact California, Oregon, or Washington. ShakeAlert’s primary goal is to provide usable warning times before the arrival of damaging shaking. EEW is most likely to achieve this goal in large‐magnitude earthquakes. In recent years, ShakeAlert has gone through a series of upgrades to its underlying scientific algorithms aimed at improved performance during large earthquakes. Version 3 of this software recently went live in the production system and includes improvements to all algorithms. The main seismic algorithms that detect an earthquake and characterize its location, magnitude, and fault rupture orientation are faster than older versions. Other key changes include: using real‐time geodetic data to characterize the magnitude growth in large earthquakes; the introduction of an alert pause procedure to compromise between speed near the epicenter and improved accuracy at larger distances; and the inclusion of a nonergodic site‐response model in the ground‐motion predictions. ShakeAlert has achieved its primary goal of usable warning times before strong shaking at some locations in real‐time operations in recent M 6 earthquakes. Using offline tests, we demonstrate usable warning times are possible for many sites with peak shaking values of modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) 7–8 in M 7+ earthquakes and also for many MMI 8–9 sites in M 8+ earthquakes. ShakeAlert partners use a variety of MMI and magnitude thresholds in deciding when to alert their users within bounds set by the USGS. Our study shows that there is room to raise the magnitude thresholds up to about M 5.5 without adversely affecting performance in large earthquakes. The ground‐motion criteria are more complex owing to a significant drop‐off in warning times between the MMI 4 and 5 levels of predicted shaking. However, widely used ShakeAlert products, such as the MMI 3 and 4 contour products, can provide sufficiently long warning times before strong shaking in moderate‐to‐great earthquakes to enable a range of protective actions.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS2024

Incorporating intensity distance attenuation into PLUM ground-motion-based earthquake early warning in the United States: The APPLES configuration

We develop Attenuated ProPagation of Local Earthquake Shaking (APPLES), a new configuration for the United States West Coast version of the Propagation of Local Undamped Motion (PLUM) earthquake early warning (EEW) algorithm that incorporates attenuation into its ground-motion prediction procedures. Under APPLES, instead of using a fixed radius to forward-predict observed peak ground shaking to the area surrounding a seismic station, the forward-predicted intensity at a location depends on the distance from the station using an intensity prediction relationship. We conduct conceptual tests of maximum intensity distribution predictions in APPLES and PLUM using a catalog of ShakeMaps to confirm that the attenuation relationship in APPLES is appropriately modeling shaking distributions for West Coast earthquakes. Then, we run APPLES and PLUM in simulated real-time tests to determine warning time performance. Finally, we compare real-time alert behavior during the 2022 M 6.4 Ferndale, California, earthquake and other recent events. We find that APPLES presents two potential improvements to PLUM by reducing over-alerting during smaller magnitude earthquakes and by increasing warning times in some locations during larger earthquakes. APPLES can produce missed and late alerts in locations that experience shaking intensities close to the level used to issue alerts, so preferred alerting strategies with APPLES would use alert thresholds that are lower than the intensities targeted for EEW alerts. We find alerts using APPLES are also similar to those for the source-based approaches currently used in the ShakeAlert EEW system, which will make APPLES easier to integrate into the system.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2022

Testing the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system using synthesized earthquake sequences

We test the behavior of the United States (US) West Coast ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system during temporally close earthquake pairs to understand current performance and limitations. We consider performance metrics based on source parameter and ground‐motion forecast accuracy, as well as on alerting timeliness. We generate ground‐motion times series for synthesized earthquake sequences from real data by combining the signals from pairs of well‐recorded earthquakes (⁠4.4≤M≤7.1⁠) using time shifts ranging from −60 to +180 s. We examine fore‐ and aftershock sequences, near‐simultaneous events in different source regions, and simulated out‐of‐network and offshore earthquakes. We find that the operational ShakeAlert algorithms Earthquake Point‐source Integrated Code (EPIC) and Finite‐Fault Rupture Detector (FinDer) and the Propagation of Local Undamped Motion (PLUM) method perform largely as expected: EPIC provides the best source location estimates and is often fastest but can underestimate magnitudes or, in extreme cases, miss large earthquakes; FinDer provides real‐time line‐source models and unsaturated magnitude estimates for large earthquakes but currently cannot process concurrent events and may mislocate offshore earthquakes; PLUM identifies pockets of strong ground motion, but can overestimate alert areas. Implications for system performance are: (1) spatially and temporally close events are difficult to identify separately; (2) challenging scenarios with foreshocks that are close in space and time can lead to missed alerts for large earthquakes; and (3) in these situations the algorithms can often estimate ground motion better than source parameters. To improve EEW, our work suggests revisiting the current algorithm weighting in ShakeAlert, to continue developments that focus on using ground‐motion data to aggregate alerts from multiple algorithms, and to investigate methods to optimally leverage algorithm ground‐motion estimates. For testing and certification of EEW performance in ShakeAlert and other EEW systems where applicable, we also suggest that 25 of our 73 scenarios become part of the baseline data set.

California↗

USGS2022

Alert optimization of the PLUM earthquake early warning algorithm for the western United States

We determine an optimal alerting configuration for the propagation of local undamped motion (PLUM) earthquake early warning (EEW) algorithm for use by the U.S. ShakeAlert system covering California, Oregon, and Washington. All EEW systems should balance the primary goal of providing timely alerts for impactful or potentially damaging shaking while limiting alerts for shaking that is too low to be of concern (precautionary alerts). The PLUM EEW algorithm forward predicts observed ground motions to nearby sites within a defined radius without accounting for attenuation, avoiding the earthquake source parameter estimation step of most EEW algorithms. PLUM was originally developed in Japan where the alert regions and ground motions for which alerts are issued differ from those implemented by ShakeAlert. We compare predicted ground motions from PLUM to ShakeMap‐reported ground motions for a set of 22 U.S. West Coast earthquakes of magnitude 4.4–7.2 and evaluate available warning times. We examine a range of prediction radii (20–100 km), thresholds used to issue an alert (alert threshold), and levels of impactful or potentially damaging shaking (target threshold). We find optimal performance when the alert threshold is close to the target threshold, although higher target ground motions benefit from somewhat lower alert thresholds to ensure timely alerts. We also find that performance, measured as the cost reduction that a user can achieve, depends on the user’s tolerance for precautionary alerts. Users with a low target threshold and high tolerance for precautionary alerts achieve optimal performance when larger prediction radii (60–100 km) are used. In contrast, users with high target thresholds and low tolerance for precautionary alerts achieve better performance for smaller prediction radii (30–60 km). Therefore, setting the PLUM prediction radius to 60 km balances the needs of many users and provides warning times of up to ∼20 s.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2021

Robust earthquake early warning at a fraction of the cost: ASTUTI Costa Rica

We show that a fixed smartphone network can provide robust Earthquake Early Warning for at least two orders of magnitude less cost than scientific-grade networks. Our software and cloud-based data architecture that we have constructed for the Alerta Sismica Temprana Utilizando Teléfonos Inteligentes (ASTUTI; Earthquake Early Warning Utilizing Smartphones) network in Costa Rica is easily scaled and exported. Implementation comprises provisioning and installing modern smartphones in judicious locations. Stand-up time for regionally operational networks can be on the order of days. We evaluated a non-parametric ground-motion detection and alerting strategy that would alert the entire Costa Rican population of any event with a ground motion detection threshold of 0.55–0.65 %g at four neighboring stations. During a 6-month evaluation period ASTUTI detected and alerted on five of 13 earthquakes with M w 4.8–5.3 that caused felt Modified Mercalli Intensity shaking levels of 4.3–6. The system did not produce any false alerts and the undetected events did not produce wide-spread or significant felt shaking. System latencies were less than or similar to scientific-grade latencies. Alerts for all five detected events would have reached the capital city, San Jose, before strong S -wave shaking. This would have afforded time for Drop Cover Hold On actions by most residents. Two of the five alerts were triggered by P -waves suggesting that smartphone-based networks could approach the fastest theoretical EEW performance, especially with future expected improvements in smartphone sensors and processing algorithms.

AGU Advances↗

USGS2020

Real-time performance of the PLUM earthquake early warning method during the 2019 M6.4 and M7.1 Ridgecrest, California, Earthquakes

We evaluate the timeliness and accuracy of ground‐motion‐based earthquake early warning (EEW) during the July 2019 M 6.4 and 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquakes. In 2018, we began retrospective and internal real‐time testing of the propagation of local undamped motion (PLUM) method for earthquake warning in California, Oregon, and Washington, with the potential that PLUM might one day be included in the ShakeAlert EEW system. A real‐time version of PLUM was running on one of the ShakeAlert EEW system’s development servers at the time of the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence, allowing us to evaluate the timeliness and accuracy of PLUM’s warnings for the M 6.4 and 7.1 mainshocks in real time with the actual data availability and latencies of the operational ShakeAlert EEW system. The latter is especially important because high‐data latencies during the M 7.1 earthquake degraded ShakeAlert’s performance. PLUM proved to be largely immune to these latencies. In this article, we present a retrospective analysis of PLUM performance and explore three potential regional alerting strategies ranging from spatially large regions (counties), to moderate‐size regions (National Weather Service public forecast zones), to high‐spatial specificity (50 km regular geographic grid). PLUM generated initial shaking forecasts for the two mainshocks 5 and 6 s after their respective origin times, and faster than the ShakeAlert system’s first alerts. PLUM was also able to accurately forecast shaking across southern California for all three alerting strategies studied. As would be expected, a cost‐benefit analysis of each approach illustrates trade‐offs between increasing warning time and minimizing the area receiving unneeded alerts. Choosing an optimal alerting strategy requires knowledge of users’ false alarm tolerance and minimum required warning time for taking protective action, as well as the time required to distribute alerts to users.

California↗

USGS2019

Event detection performance of the PLUM earthquake early warning algorithm in southern California

We test the Japanese ground‐motion‐based earthquake early warning (EEW) algorithm, propagation of local undamped motion (PLUM), in southern California with application to the U.S. ShakeAlert system. In late 2018, ShakeAlert began limited public alerting in Los Angeles to areas of expected modified Mercalli intensity (⁠IMMI⁠) 4.0+ for magnitude 5.0+ earthquakes. Most EEW systems, including ShakeAlert, use source‐based methods: they estimate the location, magnitude, and origin time of an earthquake from P waves and use a ground‐motion prediction equation to identify regions of expected strong shaking. The PLUM algorithm uses observed ground motions directly to define alert areas and was developed to address deficiencies in the Japan Meteorological Agency source‐based EEW system during the 2011 Mw 9.0 Tohoku earthquake sequence. We assess PLUM using (a) a dataset of 193 magnitude 3.5+ earthquakes that occurred in southern California between 2012 and 2017 and (b) the ShakeAlert testing and certification suite of 49 earthquakes and other seismic signals. The latter suite includes events that challenge the current ShakeAlert algorithms. We provide a first‐order performance assessment using event‐based metrics similar to those used by ShakeAlert. We find that PLUM can be configured to successfully issue alerts using IMMI trigger thresholds that are lower than those implemented in Japan. Using two stations, a trigger threshold of IMMI 4.0 for the first station and a threshold of IMMI 2.5 for the second station PLUM successfully detect 12 of 13 magnitude 5.0+ earthquakes and issue no false alerts. PLUM alert latencies were similar to and in some cases faster than source‐based algorithms, reducing area that receives no warning near the source that generally have the highest ground motions. PLUM is a simple, independent seismic method that may complement existing source‐based algorithms in EEW systems, including the ShakeAlert system, even when alerting to light (⁠IMMI 4.0) or higher ground‐motion levels.

California↗